Marin Voice: A problem in Tam High School District that needs addressing

THE TAMALPAIS Union High School District remains one of the best in California. The quality of staff, faculty and administrative, is excellent. Unfortunately the district shares with many school districts an aversion to open communication with the public in providing access to critical information regarding problems.

There is a problem in the district associated with the relationship between the faculty and school board and administration. I make no determination as to which parties are at fault. My sources are multiple and highly reliable.

In spring 2011, the board commissioned a "Listening Campaign," a survey of faculty conducted by the National Equity Project. Such surveys are done by most responsible school districts. It was done in person with teachers in focus groups with a facilitator and an official note taker. Most faculty were involved.

In June 2011, the board reported the results. The summary it provided was relatively general, briefly summarizing differences of opinion. Requests for specific percentages and detailed reports from the listening sessions were denied. A number of board members indicated that there was negative data that was too critical to share publicly.

In terms of public disclosure, the board should have shared a full written report, including transcripts from the focus groups, protecting the anonymity of faculty members, plus a full statistical summary.

Given the limits of that report, Tamalpais Federation of Teachers leaders designed its own 13-item survey, given to faculty last spring. About 70 percent of faculty responded.

The first three questions dealt with overall satisfaction as a teacher or counselor and satisfaction with salary and benefits. Seventy-five to 85 percent of the responses across these items were positive. Most staff clearly like working in the district. Similarly, 67 percent of the academic staff is satisfied with the Tamalpais Federation of Teachers.

Then the results shift. Over 70 percent are dissatisfied with the "climate" of the district and over 60 percent dissatisfied with its direction. Seventy-three percent report dissatisfaction with the district administration and 60 percent are dissatisfied with the school board. Seventy-six percent are dissatisfied with the district's decision-making processes and 70 percent are critical of the frequency and clarity of communication in the district. These are not normative responses for well-functioning districts.

There is also disapproval for three instructional development and curricula programs, although it is less pronounced.

Faculty members were e-mailed the results, but there has never been an open response from faculty leaders, school board or the administration. If something is being done with the data, the educational community has never been informed. There is no evidence of any open discussion of the results by the faculty, board and administration.

Blaming and defending is a counter-productive waste of time. But when there is this much of an apparent schism between faculty and district leadership it needs to be addressed and the community has a right to know how it is being addressed.

Why have the detailed results of the original survey been withheld from the faculty and from the larger educational community?

Why have the results of this latest faculty survey not been on a board meeting agenda?

What has been the role of the union leadership, the board, and the administration in this process?

Law protects the confidentiality of deliberations about individual performances by teachers and administrators, but this is not about individual evaluations. It is about identified problems in the district that relate to decision-making and communication. It is about the degree of openness between the district and the public, including the press. Ultimately it is a disservice to students to not have faculty, board and administration working together with mutual trust to meet student needs.

We don't need public relations spinning or defenses. What we need is specific information on what is being done to address these problems.

Mark Phillips of Woodacre is professor emeritus of education at San Francisco State University. He is a regular contributor to Marin Voice.